I hear this Anthony Edwards kid is a lot like Jordan...

[thedangerouskitchen]

Never forget the league moved the 3pt line in so Mike could set personal bests in % because he simply wasn't good enough to hit them at the old distance.

EPIC fail, as the line was shortened when Jordan was playing baseball.

[thedangerouskitchen]

For starters I would look at how many FGA are taken to determine....

Oh...so suddenly it's "rebounds per something [rebounding chances]" and not per-game.

Gotcha.

Nice, complete and total 180.

lmao!

It's Rebounds per Game in addition to several other factors that I mentioned. What it's "not" is your silly per100 or per 36 nonsense.

[thedangerouskitchen]

Never forget the league moved the 3pt line in so Mike could set personal bests in % because he simply wasn't good enough to hit them at the old distance.

Indeed.

The league actively cheated for Jordan on threes, and he still couldn't match what a random relative-non shooter in 2024 does from three.

The skill gap is almost inhuman at this point between boomer ball and modern ball.

Especially at the start of the 94-95 season when they moved the line in while Mike was playing baseball.

at bush owning himself.

What was that you said earliuer... learn to take your L's and move on, or something like that?

[Bush4Ever.]

It's Rebounds per Game in addition to several other factors that I mentioned. What it's "not" is your silly per100 or per 36 nonsense.

You shouldn't be so shameless. It makes you look less intelligent and more dishonest than you probably are in regular life.

More possessions = more chances to accumulate *everything* (counting based) in volume.

It's not any more complicated than that. That's why quantity of possessions confounds counting statistics.

Giannis averaged 31.1 points/game in 2023.
Malone averaged 31.0 points/game in 1990.
Giannis advantage (per-game): 0.3 percent

But wait!

Giannis averaged 32.1 minutes a game to Malone's 38.1 minutes a game.

What does it look like when looking at per-possession?

Wow!

Giannis: 46.2/100 possessions
Malone: 40.6/100 possessions
Giannis advantage: 13.8 percent (5.6/40.6)*(100).

It's almost like...pace and quantity of possessions is a super obvious confound in calculating per-game totals or something.

lmao

[_Vcsgrizzfan_]

TDK is mind numbingly stupid.

[AlaskaHawks]

Basic statistics seem to confuse some Boomers. But at least you have 600k sitting in a .25% interest rate savings account.

[Da Stars.]

Basic statistics seem to confuse some Boomers. But at least you have 600k sitting in a .25% interest rate savings account.

As a confused boomer, I would rather have .25% on my savings than understand some form of advanced metrics.

[AlaskaHawks]

Basic statistics seem to confuse some Boomers. But at least you have 600k sitting in a .25% interest rate savings account.

As a confused boomer, I would rather have .25% on my savings than understand some form of advanced metrics.

Yikes.

[Sudanese Sensation]

Basic statistics seem to confuse some Boomers. But at least you have 600k sitting in a .25% interest rate savings account.

As a confused boomer, I would rather have .25% on my savings than understand some form of advanced metrics.

That's one quarter of a percent, Stars. Better to put your money in T Bills, a CD, or a fixed annuity if you're looking for conservative investments.
.

[Sudanese Sensation]

Stars, you should ask Grizz for financial advice.

[Da Stars.]

Basic statistics seem to confuse some Boomers. But at least you have 600k sitting in a .25% interest rate savings account.

As a confused boomer, I would rather have .25% on my savings than understand some form of advanced metrics.

Yikes.

LOL. I even refigured it the second time and went yike. Then realized, I was wrong again.

[PhutureDynasty]

He is Michael Jordan...

- Both SGs

- Both played multiple sports

- Both competitive at everything

- Both raise their game come playoff time

Ant even looks like Mike.

[thedangerouskitchen]

It's Rebounds per Game in addition to several other factors that I mentioned. What it's "not" is your silly per100 or per 36 nonsense.

Irrelevant drivel...

We're discussing Rebounds professor... not Points.



PS: Again, no one cares how many Rebounds or Points Player A scored per100, fool. Manipulating "per game" stats is for people who can only "think", not "do". But since you brought it up:

Malone: 19.8 FGA / 11.1 FTA = 31.0-PPG on 56%
Giannis: 20.3 FGA / 12.3 FTA = 31.1-PPG on 55%

Why should I care how many Minutes each guy played? Who cares. Does Giannis get extra credit for chuckin' up more "FGA per Minute" than Malone?

Again, no one cares.

"Reality" says Malone and Giannis averaged the same number of Points per game and Malone was slightly more Efficient in doing so... and you can figure all that out withOut your silly per100, or your silly fake stats, charts and disserations.

[Bush4Ever.]

We're discussing Rebounds professor... not Points.

Ah, okay.

Number of possessions influences the number of rebounding chances you get, and not the number of scoring chances you get.

I can tell you are calm and thoughtful. Good work.

Spoiler:

In the Giannis vs. Malone example, the point wasn't if one was better than the other, more efficient or better overall...it was the show how number of possessions is a potentially meaningful confound to scoring volume. Malone scored the same per game...but only because he had a way, way higher number of possessions to score from.

I'm sure you could find an example that ran the other way, where a modern guy benefited from more possessions per game than an old (but not too old) school player. That's not the point lol

[thedangerouskitchen]

**TDK wondering aloud if he writes in Chinese or Spanish bush might be able to understand that (again) no one cares about per100, per36, or those fake stats that are woefully flawed and misleading (the vast majority of them, anyway).**

Malone (in 1990) and Giannis (2023) took the same number of FGA per game and scored the same amount of Points per game, with Malone shooting slightly more efficiently.

Simple. It doesn't take charts, graphs, random made-up formulas, per100 possessions, etc. to draw that conclusion, professor... at least astute fans can do so rather easily, as I just illustrated.

[Bush4Ever.]

dp

[Bush4Ever.]

For basketball, X number of shots take in X minutes often connotes something different than the same quantity of shots taken in a more compressed period of time. Generally, the more shots taken in the same period of time (all else equal), the lower will be the quality of shot, etc...

If Malone had played in the exact same way, in the exact same number of minutes as Giannis...he would have scored less in volume. Conversely, if Giannis had upped his minutes, it's likely he would have seen efficiency drops, all else being equal, unless he was really, really coasting and not emptying the tank in those 32 minutes/game. That's not "analytics" lol. That's basic basketball stuff.

Interestingly though, while I'm here....

Malone shot *worse* than Giannis is raw 2pt percentage...but better relative to the league (2pt+ of 116 for Malone and 109 for Giannis)...taking strict (dumb) 2pt percentage would actually flip Malone's clearly efficiency edge on 2s to a small, but clear edge to Giannis (59.6 on 2s vs. 56.7 on 2s) because of era differences!

But! Malone had a higher FG percentage than Giannis, despite a lower one on twos...why? Giannis bricklayered his head off from three that year and added a bunch of misses to the denominator of FGAs.

Malone averaged a TS+ of 117 that year to Giannis' 104, despite having only a 0.9% difference in raw FG percentage.

How?

Well...free throws. Giannis was a bricklayer and Malone was average....at gigantic free throw rates that added up over time to give Malone an edge in absolute terms (TS) and a big one in relative terms (TS+).

So we have two frameworks:

1. "These guys are almost exactly equal because they both averaged 31 a game on 20 shot attempts a game on virtually the same FG percentage (boomer analysis).

2. "Giannis was a more rapid scorer, but definitely less efficient, almost exclusively as a function of free throw shooting." (smart, handsome, modern analysis).

Suffice it to say, number two is closer to reality.

[thedangerouskitchen]

For basketball, X number of shots take in X minutes often connotes something different than the same quantity of shots taken in a more compressed period of time. Generally, the more shots taken in the same period of time (all else equal), the lower will be the quality of shot, etc...

If Malone had played in the exact same way, in the exact same number of minutes as Giannis...he would have scored less in volume. Conversely, if Giannis had upped his minutes, it's likely he would have seen efficiency drops, all else being equal, unless he was really, really coasting and not emptying the tank in those 32 minutes/game. That's not "analytics" lol. That's basic basketball stuff.

Interestingly though, while I'm here....

Malone shot *worse* than Giannis is raw 2pt percentage...but better relative to the league (2pt+ of 116 for Malone and 109 for Giannis)...taking strict (dumb) 2pt percentage would actually flip Malone's clearly efficiency edge on 2s to a small, but clear edge to Giannis (59.6 on 2s vs. 56.7 on 2s) because of era differences!

But! Malone had a higher FG percentage than Giannis, despite a lower one on twos...why? Giannis bricklayered his head off from three that year and added a bunch of misses to the denominator of FGAs.

Malone averaged a TS+ of 117 that year to Giannis' 104, despite having only a 0.9% difference in raw FG percentage.

How?

Well...free throws. Giannis was a bricklayer and Malone was average....at gigantic free throw rates that added up over time to give Malone an edge in absolute terms (TS) and a big one in relative terms (TS+).

So we have two frameworks:

1. "These guys are almost exactly equal because they both averaged 31 a game on 20 shot attempts a game on virtually the same FG percentage (boomer analysis).

2. "Giannis was a more rapid scorer, but definitely less efficient, almost exclusively as a function of free throw shooting." (smart, handsome, modern analysis).

Suffice it to say, number two is closer to reality.

All that time wasted on formula's, number manipulation, "if this, if that", etc... and at the end of the day your "advanced analysis" yielded the same conclusions as TDK:

- Both averaged 31
- Both took the same number of shots
- Malone was a little more Efficient shooter, while Giannis scored more Points per Minute

Again, that's EXACTLY what I said Mr. Modern Analysis.

[Bush4Ever.]

He wasn't a little more efficient, he was a lot more efficient, in a way that is completely muted by looking at strict FG percentage or even strict TS. The *nature* of efficiency was also different than what you implied (Giannis is actually better than Malone in dumb 2pt percentage, but is so bad on FT it gets cancelled out and then some overall).

FFS, I was throwing you a bone and pointing out a comparison that actually benefited a geezer for a change.

lol

[thedangerouskitchen]

He wasn't a little more efficient, he was a lot more efficient, in a way that is completely muted by looking at strict FG percentage or even strict TS. The *nature* of efficiency was also different than what you implied (Giannis is actually better than Malone in dumb 2pt percentage, but is so bad on FT it gets cancelled out and then some overall).

FFS, I was throwing you a bone and pointing out a comparison that actually benefited a geezer for a change.

lol

No, he wasn't.

Malone: 11.1 FG's on 19.8 Attempts / .562%
Giannia: 11.2 FG's on 20.3 Attempts / .553%

Hardly "a lot" more Efficient... almost dead-even actually.



Yes Malone had a sizeable edge in FT% (.762% vs. ,645%) but FT's aren't the same as taking 12-15 foot jumpers or 3-pointers, etc, so I couldn't care less what TS% says, or what TS+ or BS, CBS or NBC has to say about it because those made-up stats are flawed and unreliable... but for the hell of it, Malone wasn't even "a lot" more efficient when you look at TS% either:

Malone: .626%
Giannis: .605%

More Efficient, yes... but again, hardly by "a lot".

And FTR, for as much of an edge Malone had in FT%, the raw numbers aren't all that significant:

Malone: 8.5 Made on 11.1 FTA
Giannis: 7.9 Made on 12.3 FTA

0.6 more Points per game on 1.2 fewer Attemptes is definitely an edge for Malone, but again, we're not talking about a Shaq/Wilt vs. Steph/Nash disparity here.

Malone was a little more Efficient. Not "a lot"... that much is clear without the use of "modern analysis".